road guy, convicted a big responsible for laundering billions in drug money? is this about stopping drugs coming into the u.s.? we can argue whether bombing 25 boats in the caribbean will have an impact. also, the deadly strike in america is fentanyl. we are blowing up cocaine. not that cocaine is not a problem. but it seems you would be focused on the fentanyl aspect of it. i worry about what is happening here. is this more a matter of the assertion of dominance over the western hemisphere? i don't think that is in the best interests of the american people. i want to stop the drugs. i am not sure this is the best way to go about doing it. the legality of it does matter. president trump has decided we are going to have the death penalty for drug dealers and he is going to be judge, jury, and

executioner with no due process, six >> the reagan national defense forum has resumed. now, secretary pete hegseth, live coverage on c-span. [applause] sec. hegseth: thank you, and good afternoon. folks in washington like to invoke president reagan's name, often when they criticize president trump. they say or insinuate donald trump is nothing like ronald reagan. they say the current president's approach is nothing like the vision championed by ronald reagan at the height of the cold war as we grappled with the soviets and ultimately prevailed. with those folks are wrong. they are dead wrong. most to invoke ronald reagan's

name today, especially self-styled republican hawks, are not much like ronald reagan. the policies they champion are nothing like his. for the better part of 30 years, they have been quite the opposite. if you look at actual policies, donald trump is the true and rightful heir of ronald reagan. it is president trump who has inherited and restored president reagan's powerful but focused and realistic approach to national defense. it is therefore only fitting that we gather at the reagan presidential library today to talk about president trump's america first, peace through strength, common sense agenda, and what it means at the department of war. one need only look at the results to understand why president trump is that rightful heir.

so, let's look at what reagan and his administration actually did. reagan rebuilt the military after vietnam. that is rightfully considered one of his greatest achievements. president trump has done and is doing the same, making historic investments in defense. but president reagan also believed sincerely in the peace part of peace through strength, as his actions showed. it was not a popular thing to do at the time, at the height of the cold war, to talk to communists. yet president reagan did. during his high profile meetings with mikael gorbachev and others, ronald reagan saw the prudence and potential in engaging with our nation's adversaries from a position of strength, so he did. even in the face of fierce criticism at home, including from his own party. president reagan was not naïve. he recognized fruitful

engagements with our adversaries were only possible from a position of strength, especially military strength, which is why he focused so much on building up the american military. we still talk about the reagan buildup. my kids and yours will someday talk about the trump buildup. president reagan and his team inherited a military worn down from their generation's endless war in vietnam. they took the lessons of that war to heart. this is why he was so deliberate in how he used the joint force. indeed, the most famous military doctrine of the reagan administration, named for his secretary of defense, caspar weinberger, plus specifically designed to correct for the failures that led to vietnam. among other key principles, the weinberger doctrine stipulated the united states should not commit forces to combat unless the final natural interest of

the united states or its allies are involved. two, u.s. troops should only be committed wholeheartedly and with the clear intention of winning. otherwise, troops should not be committed. third, yes combat troops should be committed only with clearly defined political and military objectives and with the capacity to accomplish those objectives. and forth, the commitment of u.s. troops should be considered only as a last resort. this is sound stuff, and it was reflected in how present reagan actually used the american military, and a focused, decisive manner, and only when he determined it was in our nation's vital interest to do so. in fact, throughout his time in office, present reagan only committed u.s. grant forces twice, in grenada and in lebanon. otherwise coming focused the joint force on the cold war era

threat and priority theater, soviets in europe. that is how present reagan achieved peace through strength always with a clear-eyed toward -- clear eye toward lasting peace. ronald reagan's discipline, focused, and realistic approach with a far cry from the grandiose nationbuilding moralistic and rudderless wars many of his self-described acolytes led us into in the decades after reagan left office. wars my generation fought in. it is only under president trump's leadership during his first term and now we have been able to restore america's greatness after years of suffering under the so-called bipartisan consensus, which is really just a euphemism for disastrous foreign policy. out with utopian idealism, in with hard-nosed realism.

to be specific, ronald reagan taught us the value of focus, powerful leadership. but his so-called disciples did not heed that lesson. since the end of the cold war, generation of self-proclaimed neo reaganites who touted reagan's name but did not govern like him, all the bluster, none of the clarity, that is especially true in the military realm. this generation of self-proclaimed neo-reaganites abandoned reagan's actual wise policies in favor of unchecked neo-conservativism. in economics, they dismantled our industrial base, shipping it overseas. at the same time and diplomacy and defense, they swore off the clear-eyed flexible realism of reagan, nixon, and eisenhower. instead, they set about trying to make america the policeman, the protector, the arbiter of the whole world. democracy for all, they say,

even when people do not want it and cannot do it. they turned american allies into dependents, all but encouraging these nations in europe and around the world to free ride while we subsidized their defense with u.s. taxpayer dollars. these self-described neo-reaganites sought global military hegemony under the auspices of peace through strength. instead, we got rudderless wars in the middle east and the economic rise of china. after presiding over such poor performance, it is remarkable that these people still think they are qualified to speak in public, let alone moralize to the rest of us. some of them have even been awarded on this very stage. but president trump knows better. he knows what it means to restore peace through strength

on an enduring basis, to put our nation's interests first and the american people first, in a way that is practical, applicable, and common sense, that leaves importantly america better but also leaves our allies better off. it is the vision he ran on and led on the -- in his first term and is building on in his second. that the vision not be that let us to division but will bring us back to the true legacy of ronald reagan. out with utopian idealism, in with hard-nosed realism. just look at the facts. like president reagan, president trump is dedicated to both sides of the peace through strength coin. not just using that phrase as a thin veil for warmongering. in less than a year, president

trump has secured eight major peace deals including an historic end to the war in gaza and he is not finished yet. even as we speak, under the present's leadership, we are working tirelessly to end the tragic war in ukraine, were that never would have started if he had been president. the world sees an entirely different america today. these historic opportunities for peace are not happening by chance. it is president trump's vision and determination. like president reagan, president trump is willing to talk to rivals. from mikael gorbachev to vladimir and xi jinping today. this is borne of strength, not weakness. it is born of clarity and purpose. folks in washington like to criticize president trump for doing so but those critics forget this is exactly what ronald reagan did.

and america was better off for it. like president reagan, president trump also knows how important it is to negotiate from a position of strength, especially military strength. and at the newly renamed department of war, thanks to president trump's leadership and to congress, we received an historic boost in funding last year and believe that is only just beginning. make no mistake about it. president trump is hell-bent on maintaining and accelerating the most powerful military the world has ever seen. the most powerful, the most lethal, and american-made. the arsenal of freedom. we are also restoring the warrior ethos back to basics, readiness, accountability, standards, discipline, lethality. i am not sure if you saw, but i recently gave a speech on that topic to a few generals through

quantico. the war department is the sort and the shield of peace through strength. we are the strengths department. we stand ready to wield that sword as president trump directs. the opposite of peace through strength is war through weakness, wokeness, weakness and war, all specialties of joe biden and lloyd austin. the debacle in afghanistan, the stain on our country, and a sin committed against the troops, the weakness that released islam is war on october 7, and the same weakness inviting war in ukraine, and vladimir putin saw the open door and took it. spy balloons over our country. wokeness, weakness, war. i was recently tempted when the

discussion went out about hitting drug boats to use the phrase, "righteous strike." but then my team counseled me against it and said, sir, that was the phrase used by mark milley when a family of afghans was struck as a response to what happened. they called it for two straight days a righteous strike, when they would have known within hours zappe what they struck. weakness, wokeness, war. it is a new day. with operation midnight hammer, the world saw after decades of hemming and hawing the decisive effect of american military strength and obliterating -- and obliterating the iranian nuclear program. president trump said they cannot have a nuclear bomb and he meant it. others said it, president trump did it. this was a textbook example of the weinberger doctrine in

action. disciplined, focused, advanced our nation's interests while avoiding another protracted war. the same goes for a limited but lethal actions against the houthis in yemen. joe biden targeted your shipping. president trump restored freedom of navigation, another foundational natural interest rate somewhere, thomas jefferson is smiling. right now, the world is here again we are focused and clear, if you're working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you. let there be no doubt about it. president trump will take decisive action.

he knows how to do that in a clear way. just as the lessons of vietnam informed ronald reagan. the lessons of iraq and afghanistan guide president trump and his secretary today. for years, a bipartisan consensus will lead us from one disaster to another. they sent our sons and daughters to war. even as they allowed allies to grow strong. from the very beginning, nearly a decade ago, president trump called the south for what it is. stupid.

they fought him for it. they try to jail him for it. they failed. there time is over. it is done. it is finished. we are once again putting american interests first. we are prioritizing our nation's security, and prosperity. our citizens we are doing is in a way that not only leaves our nation better off, but also the world. the president's approach is one of those flexible rules. if you look at the world with a

clear eye perspective. we will define our vital interests in ways that are reasonable and make sense to ordinary americans. this approach is our focus. we will not be moralizing. we will instead put our nation's practical, concrete interests first. we will defend our people. peace is our goal. we will always be ready to fight and win decisively to call upon. we are asking american taxpayers

to fund the world's greatest military. we are asking mothers and fathers across america to trust us with their most precious resource. their sons and daughters. we will honor their trust in their sacrifice. we will not send america's best to advance a full hearty adventures around the world. it means not asking them to pick up the tab. we only ask our warriors to fight for things that make america safe, free, and prosperous. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. nothing more and nothing less. this is common sense.

that is what the war department is all about. we will deter china through strength. not confrontation. we will increase burden sharing for u.s. allies and partners. and we will supercharge the u.s. defense industrial base. as we apply president trump's approach to flexible realism from the first two lines of effort are the primary operational focus. for the simple reason that these missions met of the most for safety, freedom, and prosperity. at the same time, other threats that exist around the world. that is why we also prioritize burden sharing and burden shifting.

this is not only an afterthought. or a nice thing to have. it is a core element of our national defense. the fourth line of effort is maybe the most important. supercharging america's defense industrial base. it underwrites everything else. last month i gave another speech in washington to defense industry leaders to announce a departmentwide transformation. focus on results. the bottom line is a historic generational and transformational change that we will implement.

we have the unique ability to scale quickly. all at the speed of urgency. that speech stands on its own. so i will spend the balance of my time talking about the other three lines of effort. the first of which is defending the u.s. homeland. the biden administration was more concerned about ukraine's borders in their own. they made a controversial to say that border security is national security. that is absurd. border security is national security and we are prioritizing it accordingly. since january 20, at the direction of president trump, the department of war has made it a top priority to defend our nation's borders. to get 100% operational control

of the border. we did so by surging forces where our troops partner to seal the border. under joe biden, tens of millions of illegals, we have no idea where the hell they came from. not to mention lethal narcotics responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands. today the number of illegals crossing into our country is zero. we are saving lives. we are proud to support our law enforcement partners. they have no business being in our country. we will secure the border by training and equipping units for defense missions.

we are leaning on a mexican counterparts to do more. so far this administration nobody has built more new border wall in the department of war. our borders should not be the first line of defense for the american homeland. they should be the last line of defense. that is why we are prioritizing our fight over cartels. you can just look at the news. not all of the news. the days in which these narco terrorists operate freely in our hemisphere are over. they are the al qaeda of our hemisphere. we are hunting them with the same sophistication imprecision that we hunted al qaeda. we are tracking them and killing them. we will keep killing them so long as they are poisoning our people with narcotics so lethal

that they are tantamount to chemical weapons. we are not doing this on her own. throughout our hemisphere are allies and partners recognize that these micro terrorists threaten them as well. so we are working together. we will keep doing so. make no mistake, we will always be ready to take decisive action. in this hemisphere. in our hemisphere. there is no safe haven for neck or terrorists. secure the border does not mean we are losing sight of other critical missions. we are doubling down. we are accelerating efforts on that right now.

it will produce tangible protection for this country. now the technology has caught up and we can actually build a golden dome for america. a game changer. we are also rapidly strengthening our nation's ability to deter and defend against cyber attacks. we have not lost sight of the threat. we are working with partners abroad to continue to hunt and kill islamic terrorists with the intent of the ability to strike our homeland. all of this rests upon the power of our nation's nuclear deterrent. which is the foundation of our

nation's defense. nothing else matters if we do not get this right. which we will. we will modernize. we will support deterrence. even a world where we face other major powers. we will test them on an equal basis. they are just about killing narco terrorists. they are about defending against other threats. the president will always provide us with critical options when needed.

in all instances we stand ready to be in good faith with our neighbors. this is the trump corollary to the monroe doctrine. recently codified so clearly. we will restore u.s. military dominance in the western hemisphere. we will use it to protect our homeland. an access to key terrain. past administrations perpetuated the belief that the monroe doctrine had expired. they were wrong. the monroe doctrine is in effect. it is stronger than ever. a commonsense restoration of our

power and prerogatives. in this hemisphere. the second part is deterrence against china. through strength, not her confrontation. we seek a stable peace, fair trade, and recycle relations with china. in november, president of the president xi pushed a major breakthrough entree. putting both nations on a strong economic pathway. reciprocal state visits next year will provide the opportunity for even more progress. the war department is committed to the same approach. opening a wider range of military communications with the people's liberation army. aimed at de-escalation.

we laid the groundwork for this with our counterparts months ago. this line of effort is based on realism. and a balance of power. which will enable all of us, all countries, to enjoy peace. where we can prosper. that is the world we seek in the in the pacific. that is what our approach is designed to produce. we will be strong. but not unnecessarily confrontational. we will speak softly and carry a big stick. we are not trying to strangle chinese growth. we are not trying to dominate them or humiliate them. nor are we trying to change the status quo.

our interested in the in the pacific are significant. this gives us the chance to be postured strongly enough to balance china's growing power. this means ensuring that none of our allies are vulnerable to sustained, successful aggression. this is what we mean by deterrence in the indo pacific. not dominating china but ensuring that they do not have the ability to dominate us. it is common sense. our role is essential. beijing must see our strength. even as we make clear our peaceful intentions, we insist that as a pacific nation ourselves, try to respect our long-standing interests in the in the pacific. and not just insist but maintain

the manifest strength to underwrite it. this involves respecting the military buildup. our department maintains a clear eyed appreciation of how this has happened. we take this capability seriously. it would be silly and disrespectful not to. this requires focus, prioritization, and clarity. that is why we're will ensure that our military if god for bid necessary project strong capabilities. that means being so strong that aggression is not a be considered. that piece is preserved. this is deterrence by denial. it is our job to ensure that president is able to negotiate from a position of strength in

order to sustain peace. this is not a pit for tomorrow. it is a reality for today. finally, our third line of effort is increasing the burden sharing with u.s. allies around the world. many seem to have lost the plot. only the u.s. has the ability to provide for defense and deterrence. according to them, if the u.s. does not do it, no one else will. america is better off subsidizing these allies. even if they are perfectly capable. that is patently ridiculous. and insulting to our allies. it is important for them to step up and do their part.

this is not just a matter of doing right by americans. this is pragmatic. as we prioritize our homeland. threats exist in different regions and our allies need to step up. and step up for real. russia has been set back. but it remains a threat. north korea looms on the korean peninsula. we must also prepare for the possibility of simultaneous threats. we don't mean that it is inevitable. but it is something the department of war must be prepared for. the best way to prepare is not by pretending we can be everywhere.

this attitude led us to fritter away our soldiers lives. our natural resources. in a support. our approach is different. in keeping with the noble tradition of reagan and nixon and eisenhower. we will actually for real get our partners to step up. we will no longer tolerate anybody. president trump has shown the way with his historic leadership that yielded commitments. nato committed to spend 5% of gdp on defense. 3.5% of core military and 1.5% on security-related investments. a pleasure to take primary responsibility for europe's conventional defense. most of us would have thought this was completely impossible. we are now pressing allies

around the world to meet this new global standard. it is working. first there was europe and canada. then south korea committed to spend 3.5 percent encore military spending. we are optimistic that they will follow suit. we will have our allies which include some of the wealthy is the world once again feeling combat credible militaries. this will form a powerful shared defensive shield. real partnerships and alliances based on hard power.

not just flags and fancy conferences. our allies are not children. they are nations capable of doing far more for themselves than they have. it is time that they stand up. many of them are nations that have proud traditions of their own. they should treat them that way. we expect them to do their part. they will receive our special favors. allies that do not step up, that still failed to do their part for collective defense, will face consequences. president trump makes sense to me. he likes helping countries that help themselves. i feel the same way. that is the nature of partnerships. it is what we owe our friends

and most importantly what we owe the american people. this is a time of great consequences. for our great republic. our forefathers fought and won the cold war, ushering in a unipolar moment in which america stood alone. it was a time of tremendous opportunity. always under a nuclear shadow. that moment is over. we have the opportunity to define what comes next. on their president trump's leadership, that is exactly what we are doing. the department of war at the president's direction is laser focused on advancing america first, peace through strength, common sense efforts. we are rebuilding our great military and every day are warriors are doing this.

we owe safety, freedom, and prosperity to the american people and we will deliver. this is what the american people voted for. in doing this, we appealed to almighty god. george washington, the founder of the war department, the war department, appeal to god's providence during every step of the improbable revolution. on prayer and on bended knee and on the battlefield. ronald reagan did the same. appealing to heaven as the world hung in the balance. we do the same today with jesus christ as our guide. may he grant us the wisdom to see what is right. and the courage to do it.

may god bless our warriors and may god bless our great republic. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] >> please welcome to the stage mr. lucas thomas and the fox news. >> thank you for your remarks. and for joining us here at the

reagan national defense forum. we were reminded all morning of the reagan doctrine. peace through strength. this reminding everyone here what you that strength. it was defense spending that was roughly two times more than what the u.s. is spending today. my question to you is should the u.s. be spending more? there are many people in this audience responsible for building and operating and funding can't -- combat systems. sec. hegseth: the present continues to say that he is dedicated to rebuilding the military. people have asked me what keeps me up. other than the operational aspects of the job, it has actually been the budget. resources. making sure we do all the work necessary to properly represent

to deter and fight nations wars. i was having these very discussions. all i can say today is the president is committed to ensuring that our industries have what is needed. we need a revived industrial base. resource wise, i think this room will be encouraged by what we will see. >> it is a high mark. we were spending 6% of our gdp on the fence. at the low mark we were spending 4.5%. today is it 3%. do you think the number will go up? sec. hegseth: i think the numbers going up. i don't want to get in front of

the president and his desire to properly shape what the budget should look like. he understands the threat better than anyone. if you have not met our deputy secretary, he is the absolute best in the business. he understands how to drive business and drive change. we are absolutely shoulder to shoulder in the belief that representing the president is exactly what we need. i believe it will be going up. >> can you take us back to the september 2 strike off the coast of venezuela? the very first one when combat operations began in the caribbean. walk us through the timeline and your role in it from mission planning, the operation, and the follow-up. sec. hegseth: it took us a couple of weeks or almost a

month to develop. i cannot get into sources and methods in all of those things for obvious reasons but you have to develop the intel picture. a lot of our assets, as i talked about, have been pointing 10,000 miles around the other side of the world for very long time. once we got to the point when the strike was evident, i had taken the decision responsibility up to my level. not many military decisions should be made by the secretary of war. i believe in deferring those decisions to local commanders as much as possible. but because of the strategic complications, i wanted to hold that at my level. the reading i received before that strike was extensive, exhaustive i would say. as each one is sense. on the military side, on the civilian side, lawyers, intel analysts, what do we know about their affiliation? a lot of things i cannot share in this room to give us the kind of confidence that we know where this is coming from, who is

driving it, who is on it, what their intentions are. all the details you need to strike a designated terrorist organization which is an important thing to remember on the top of all of this. the president has designated these as terrorist organizations poisoning and threatening the american people. making the target just like al qaeda. in that room in that moment, i cannot remember exactly how long it was. 20 or 30 minutes of a preview of what exactly was going on. my job was to say executor do not execute paradigm satisfied with the criteria. i i stayed for probably five minutes or so after but at that point tactical operation. i should not be fighting tactics as secretary of war. a couple hours later, i was told there had to be a re-attack

because there were a couple of folks who could still be in the fight. there was a link and another potential vote, drugs are still there, they were acting with them. i said, roger, sounds good. from what i understood then and what i understand now, i fully support that strike. i would have made the same call myself. those who were involved in 20 years of conflict, iraq, afghanistan, elsewhere, there is a tax on the battlefield happen often. in this case, it was well within the authorities of admiral bradley, an incredible american hero, and the 22 or 23 strikes since have followed similar protocol. the decision is not at my level anymore, and then we take the strike. >> after admiral bradley's meetings from capitol hill with joint chief, president trump said he would have no problem if the full video of the strike is released. when can we see that video?

>> we are reviewing it right now to make sure sources, methods -- it is an ongoing operation. we have operators out there doing this now. whatever we decide, we have to be responsible and we are reviewing it. >> at any time, did you ever say that everybody on board should be killed? >> i don't know where you get your sources, but they suck. of course not. anybody that has been in this situation or has been in the war room there, the secretary's office, you don't walk in and say kill them all -- it is ridiculous. it is a cartoon of me and the decisions that we made and how we make them. it is ridiculous. the chairman, everybody, anybody that knows, that is not how things go. there is a defined process. a specific criteria, go, don't go, yes, no, lawyers, you tell analysts, and then you simply say clear hot or not.

>> did you have a plan to deal with survivors? >> there is protocol. 10 strikes later, there was a semisubmersible, submarine, you don't go fishing on a submarine full of drugs. in that particular case, the first strike did not take it out. a couple of guys jumped off, from what i understand, a ways away when we struck the submarine a second time and it sunk. then you had two people you had to get. we went to go get them. that is a story that has already been out in the public. we did not change protocol. it was a different circumstance. what people think is cavalier or cowboy about it is the opposite. these are the most professional americans going through specific processes about what they can and cannot do, understanding all the authorities, all the laws of war, the capabilities, and applying it to deter our adversaries. by the way, there are not many people getting in boats right now running drugs, which is the

whole point. we would like to stop the poisoning of the american people, the catch and release program of pat them on the head and release them so they can go back to the fight did not work in afghanistan and it will not work in the caribbean. this forces them to change the way they operate and hopefully it makes the american people safe. it will make the american people safer. >> you will be releasing the boat video? >> we are reviewing it right now. >> yes or no? >> the most important thing to me are the ongoing operations in the caribbean and use those capabilities send those in the process. and i'm more interested in protecting that more than anything else in the reviewing process. >> let's move over to china, who now has the world's largest navy. for every eight warships they are building each year, the united states is building 1.8. they are building and modernizing their nuclear forces, the nuclear triad,

helping russia, building artillery, and the u.s. can only muster 40,000 rounds manufactured a month. how concerned are you about these numbers. 230% greater than the united states capability. how worried are you? >> we are well aware of their military buildup. it is right in front of us. we can only look inward and ensuring our capability. that is why we are crisscrossing the country. that is why we have overhauled. not a reform or tinkering. ask our folks were doing it. this is a complete game change in how we deliver systems to the battlefield. we have to. we don't have time. ultimately, we need to be able to field the best as quickly as possible. we see it and are aware. we are also prudent in how we

approach it, which is the way the president has approached it. >> speaking of time, we are running short, but the report cleared you for the signal. if you had to do it again, would you do it before combat operations? >> i don't live with any regrets. not a healthy way to live. i know exactly where my compass is on these troops, and the same with the president. the revival of the spirit inside our military. if you spend some time with actual formations of units, marines, soldiers, combat arms, the revival of the spirit and the desire to join and the list is at historic levels because they believe in the core of what the president is trying to do. they know he has their back, they know i have their back. silly news stories peddled for months, you have got to do it, it is not something i worry

about or they worry about. >> when you were a young platoon leader in iraq, would you want any of your soldiers communicating -- >> i had to use an at&t pay phone to call home for 1.99 dollars a minute. i would have liked anyway to actually communicate back home. >> a quick question on ai. would you rather see your soldiers, marines on the front lines armed with a i capability or have them replace with other systems? >> i think it will be both. you watch the modern battlefield. it has to be both. a couple companies we visited yesterday and what i've seen, what ai is doing to 1000 x the speed of sensing, and everything we do on the modern battlefield is critical. but metonymy, we see it in ukraine, we are learning from that, the army is learning from that, that is a huge part of the

way we do things. >> one last question, small one. who are you rooting for, army or navy? >> [laughter] >> go navy! >> go that -- we heard that. >> he is a naval academy grad, if i was a good politician, i would not answer that question. but i will say that the marine corps, of all the services, is the service that never wavered. when there was a lot of political progress and nonsense air and space, the marine corps stood strong. for this one, i'm with navy, how about that? >> thank you. appreciate it. >> i've gotta go that way. >> appreciate you. you good? ♪